A. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to apparatus and methods for identifying and processing mail. More particularly, the present invention relates to apparatus and methods for using an identification code on a mailpiece as a redundant source of identification for identifying and processing the mailpiece in a mail sorting system.
B. Description of the Related Art
Conventional systems for identifying and processing (e.g., sorting) mail require both human and mechanical operations. Human operations are initially required to load the mail from a mail delivery repository into a mechanical identification and processing system. Mechanical operations then attempt to identify the delivery address for each mailpiece and, if successful, to then process each mailpiece based on the delivery address. Processing a mailpiece can be, for example, sorting the mailpiece. If there is a failure to identify the delivery address of a mailpiece mechanically, human operators are required again to identify the delivery address. Likewise, if there is a failure to process the mailpiece based on the delivery address, human operators are also required again to process the mailpiece. Therefore, conventional systems for identifying and processing mail are dependent upon human operators, if the mechanical systems are unable to identify or process a mailpiece.
To identify mail with the conventional systems, mail is loaded into a mechanical identification system, which automatically feeds each mailpiece into an optical character reader (OCR) machine. The OCR machine then attempts to “electronically read” the delivery address from the mailpiece in order to place the delivery address in a computer. If the OCR machine cannot read the delivery address (e.g., the ZIP code), the mechanical device rejects the mailpiece. The rejected mailpiece may then be fed into another mechanical device, which presents the mailpiece to a human operator, who “physically reads” the delivery address off the mailpiece and key punches the delivery address into a computer. Once the delivery address has been either electronically or physically read and placed into a computer, the computer prints the delivery address on the mailpiece, using a special code (e.g., a bar code, such as, a POSTNET code).
To process mail with the conventional systems, mail is loaded into a mechanical processing system, which automatically sorts each mailpiece by the destination address. The majority of conventional mechanical processing systems sort each mailpiece based on a special code, such as, a ZIP code or a bar code (i.e., a POSTNET code). These mechanical processing systems may contain an OCR machine, which can read and sort a mailpiece based on the ZIP code. These mechanical processing systems may also contain a Bar Code Sorter, which can read and sort a mailpiece based on the POSTNET code. If the mechanical processing system cannot read either the ZIP code or the POSTNET code, the system rejects the mailpiece. The rejected mailpiece may then be processed by a human operator. The human operator may then determine why the mechanical processing system rejected the mailpiece, solve the problem (e.g., determine the ZIP code or reaffix the POSTNET code to the mailpiece), and then reload the mailpiece into the mechanical processing system for processing.
To improve upon these conventional systems for identifying and processing mail, the United States Postal Service developed an automated sorting system, described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,992,649 (the '649 patent), which is herein incorporated by reference. One embodiment of the system disclosed in the '649 patent is a Remote Bar Code System (RBCS). The embodiment of the RBCS described in the '649 patent provides for the electronic sorting of mail using a bar code that is placed on the front of each mailpiece, known as the POSTNET code, and another bar code that is placed on the back of each mailpiece, known as the ITEM code.
In the RBCS, the POSTNET code corresponds to the delivery address for the mailpiece, and the ITEM code corresponds to the mailpiece itself (i.e., the ITEM code is a means to “identify” each particular mailpiece). The POSTNET code represents a copy of the ZIP code in bar code format, and the POSTNET code can be used to route a mailpiece, if the ZIP code cannot be read. The ITEM code represents a unique code in bar code format, and the ITEM code can be used to identify each particular mailpiece, if the RBCS cannot otherwise identify the mailpiece. For example, in the RBCS, the ITEM code can be linked to an electronic image of the mailpiece taken at the time the mailpiece is marked with the ITEM code by the RBCS. So, if the RBCS cannot identify a mailpiece, the RBCS can recall the electronic image of the mailpiece, which contains a destination address, including the POSTNET code.
The identification and processing of mail in the RBCS is dependent upon the use of either the POSTNET code or the ITEM code. When each mailpiece is identified by the RBCS, the ITEM code is first stored temporarily until the mailpiece receives the POSTNET code and has been processed by the RBCS. If the POSTNET code becomes illegible during processing, the ITEM code may be used to obtain the POSTNET code. The ITEM code is used to store a copy of the POSTNET code in a short-term memory until the RBCS has processed the mailpiece based on the POSTNET code. However, once the mailpiece has been processed and sorted based on the POSTNET code, the RBCS can no longer access the ITEM code, because the RBCS cannot store the ITEM code locally or transmit the ITEM code to other RBCS sites.
As a result, a number of problems can arise if the POSTNET code cannot be read by the RBCS. For instance, the POSTNET code on a mailpiece might be illegible as soon as it is applied, due to the color or pattern of the mailpiece. If so, the mailpiece may be fed into a letter mail labeling machine that applies a white label to cover the illegible POSTNET code, and then, the mailpiece may be again fed into the RBCS system for identification (and printing of a new POSTNET code on the white label). Additionally, the POSTNET code might be legible when applied, but become illegible during subsequent processing of the mailpiece. Because the ITEM code is only stored until the completion of the initial processing, the RBCS cannot use the ITEM code to identify the POSTNET code during subsequent processing and sorting. Therefore, if the POSTNET code becomes illegible during subsequent processing, the mailpiece can no longer be sorted automatically by the RBCS. These problems with the RBCS result in severe disadvantages, including diminishing the efficiency of the systems for identifying and processing mail and requiring excessive human intervention.
As indicated above, there are a number of shortcomings incumbent with these conventional systems for identifying and processing mail. It is therefore desirable to overcome these shortcomings by developing apparatus and methods to identify and process mail when the ZIP code is illegible. It is also desirable to overcome these shortcomings by developing apparatus and methods to identify and process mail when the POSTNET code is illegible. It is further desirable to overcome these shortcomings by developing apparatus and methods to identify and process mail when the ITEM code is illegible. It is still further desirable to overcome these shortcomings by developing apparatus and methods to establish a redundant identification code, which may be globally used by a system for identifying and processing mail. It is additionally desirable to overcome these shortcomings by developing apparatus and methods to read an identification code by a system for identifying and processing mail. It is still additionally desirable to overcome these shortcomings by developing apparatus and methods to identify and process mail where a redundant identification code is used with a global system for identifying and processing mail, where one or more the nodes of the system are connected via hardware or software.